1. Field of Invention
Machine/Mechanical
This invention relates to fishing, specificity to an apparatus combining recycled automobile tires and a concrete pile tetrahedral frame to form an improved artificial fishing reef.
2. Description of Prior Art
Most commercially manufactured artificial reef devices are made of concrete, steel and/or fiberglass or a combination of the three. The weight of concrete and the cost of fiberglass and steel sets limits on the size of an artificial reef device due to weight and cost. Steel is expensive and will deteriorate in a salt water environment. Many artificial reef devices are made exclusively of concrete and some use some type of tire chips. The chips are mixed with the concrete and only serve as a filler. These are usually made small, due to material cost and weight, with a small surface area. Marine biologists have known for years that automobile tires make better reef material for marine growth than concrete or fiberglass. Concrete is the only known method holding and anchoring them together, that will last throughout the tires life, preventing the tires from finding their way into shrimp nets or onto beaches. That is why, under the present regulations set forth by the National Marine Fisheries and The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for artificial fishing reef devices using tires, each tire must be imbedded or captured in concrete two times the weight of the tire plus 10%. many tire reef devices have been patented, but their designs have been unable to meet the regulations set forth by the above.
The most common approved method used, was to pour a small concrete slab and imbed the tires, standing up, individually, in the concrete or stack the tires together and pour concrete, around or in the center. This produced a reef device, except for its length, was not much taller than the diameter of the tire used. This method produced a very undesirable reef device, because, due to its size and weight, the reef device would sink into the sand, with little remaining as a surface area for marine growth. Since height and surface area are the two of the most important qualities in an artificial reef device, the use of tires in artificial reefs was not well accepted, due the limitations mentioned in previous reef devices. Artificial reef structures to date have failed for one reason or another to meet the commercial needs of fisherman.
One of many attempts was George W. Rehfeld in U.S. Pat. No. 2,263,313, desribes a steel structure for jetties. The unit is not practical for artificial reefs due to cost, deterioration in salt water and small surface area. It uses no tires and provides no means for preventing sinking into the bottom.
Leo M. Krenzler U.S. Pat. No. 5,807,023, uses tires cut in half and fastened together with steel pins or steel cable. This practice is unlawful in the United States and can not meet the requirements set forth by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Steel fastenings will rust and release the tires, before the tires deteriorate.
Chung-Yi Liaw U.S. Pat. No. 5,526,763 uses tires and bouy units to float the tires as wave breakers. This reef device is designed to float and not rest on the bottom, making it difficult to anchor and survive storms in open water. This type of structure is also unlawful in the Untied States and can not meet the requirements set forth by the US Army Corps of Engineers for artificial tire reef devices.
Benjamin J. Mostkoff U.S. Pat. No. 5,259,695 uses a tetrahedron made of concrete triangles and filled with concrete and tire chips. This reef device is costly and its weight limits its size. The tire chips add nothing except an inexpensive filler, mixed with the concrete. Its small size to weight foot print will cause it to rapidly sink into the sea bottom.
Koichire Aoki, Asano U.S. Pat. No. 4,165,711 describes an elaborate artificial reef device using angled planes to control the flow of water over the reef device, in an attempt to prevent it from sinking into the bottom. This device uses no tires and is costly to produce and must be perfectly positioned on the bottom and remain that way to be effective.
Henry T. Nordberg U.S. Pat. No. 5,214,897 encases tires in concrete squares, leaving a hole through the center. This makes a small heavy reef device, small foot print to weight ratio and very little surface area for marine growth.
Charles M. Waters U.S. Pat. No. 5,080,526 uses a tetrahedral frame with an elaborate triaxial strut assembly in the center. This will make a good artificial barrier as was his intent, but a poor artificial reef device. It does not provide a very large surface area for marine growth and its foot print to weight ratio is poor, causing it to sink into the sand. The manufacture is costly and so is the transport and deployment, due to its unstackability.
A. J. Bruner, Edward T. Foster and Thomas N. Kearns U.S. Pat. No. 4,186,913 uses the simple method of pouring concrete around the tires (imbedding). The drawbacks to this method are the reef device can stand no taller than the diameter of the tire, a large suface area of the tire is wasted for marine growth, due to it being imbedded in concrete. Some settling is expected for any reef device and this device will all but disappear into the bottom, due to its short height.
Danny B. Halliburton U.S. Pat. No. 5,236,756 fastens tires together using pins and plates. This pratice for an artificial reef device is unlawful in the United States. and if it were legal, would make a poor reef device, due to height and small amount of weight. It would tend to roll away during storms or rapid current.
Donald L. Kiselewsiki U.S. Pat. No. 4,997,309 stacks automotive tires together and pours concrete in the center. This device will meet the current regulations for a concrete and tire reef devices. The device uses concrete and tires in an ineffecient manner. The end product has little surface area for marine growth for its weight. The device can not be depended upon to stand on its end on the sea bottom and lying on its side is no taller than the diameter of the tire used. The excessive small foot print to weight ratio will cause the device to sink into the sand, rendering the device ineffective as an artificial reef device.